Classroom Immersion


Action Urge Congress to defend English Model official English statute Donate Current Legislation State Profiles ProEnglish BLOG Sign up for Twitter Email sign up Issues Official English Bilingual Education English on the Job Citizenship and Immigration Bilingual Ballots Puerto Rican Statehood Ending E.O. 13166, the "Multilingual Mandate" Contact us: 1601 N. Kent St. Suite 1100 Arlington, VA 22209 ph: (703) 816-8821 fax: (571) 527-2813		For immediate release Contact: Phil Kent Feb. 20, 2009 Phone: (404) 226-3549 ProEnglish urges Supreme Court to protect English immersion classrooms ARLINGTON, VA – “We joined other groups in filing this ‘amicus curiae’ brief with the U.S. Supreme Court to defend structured English immersion – by far the most effective method for teaching English to English language learners in the public schools,” said K.C. McAlpin, the executive director of ProEnglish, an Arlington-based organization that advocates for making English the official language of government operations. In a few weeks the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the first case in many years to consider how children should be taught English: “bilingual education” or “structured English immersion.” In the case Horne v. Flores, No. 08-289, and 08-294, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the Arizona Legislature to pay more for bilingual education and took a swipe at proven, far more effective English immersion teaching techniques. The brief argues that unless the Supreme Court overturns the 9th Circuit ruling, one consequence will be that schools will have an economic incentive to delay the acquisition of English fluency skills by English language learners in order to obtain more court-ordered funding. In 2000, Arizona voters passed a ballot initiative requiring the State’s schools to switch from bilingual classrooms to teaching classes mainly in English. Arizona’s new structured English immersion program dramatically increased English language learners test scores. ProEnglish joined the Center for Equal Opportunity, the American Unity Legal Defense Fund and the English Language Political Action Committee to file the friend of the court brief. Attorney Barnaby W. Zall who wrote the brief on behalf of ProEnglish and the other organizations said, “It took us thirty years to change federal education policy away from bilingual education and toward learning English. This case could reverse that progress. The courts should protect children, not lock them away again in bilingual education.” Click here to read ProEnglish's copy of the brief.